Leftist mob want co-founder of Greenpeace Dr. Patrick Moore banned from sustainability conference
Summary
A leftist mob of journalists and professors tries to get the co-founder of Greenpeace banned from a speaking invitation. Why are they afraid to let him speak? It s February 4th, and this is the Ezra Levant Show: Why should others go to jail when you re a biggest carbon consumer?
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Hello, my rebels. Dr. Patrick Moore, the co-founder of Greenpeace, is being deplatformed.
00:00:05.360
They haven't quite done it yet, but they're trying to cancel a speech he's giving in Regina,
00:00:09.860
Saskatchewan. Just some incredible defamation of him by both the media and academia, and the
00:00:17.480
mayor there too, frankly. I'll go through it for you. Before I do, let me invite you to become a
00:00:21.860
premium content subscriber. That basically means you get the video version of this podcast, plus
00:00:26.980
Sheila Gunn-Reed's show, and David Menzies' show. Just go to premium.rebelnews.com,
00:00:49.360
Tonight, a leftist mob of journalists and professors tries to get the co-founder of Greenpeace banned
00:00:54.900
from a speaking invitation. Why are they afraid to let them speak? It's February 4th,
00:01:03.440
Why should others go to jail when you're a biggest carbon consumer I know?
00:01:07.180
There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.
00:01:11.260
The only thing I have to say to the government about why I publish it is because it's my bloody
00:01:22.080
If I told you that the co-founder of Greenpeace was the subject of a deplatforming campaign,
00:01:29.160
you know what I mean, when people try to ban you, cancel you, have you fired, have your contracts
00:01:34.740
ripped up, have you defamed, you might say, hang on, I thought that was only what the left did.
00:01:40.580
Banning the Greenpeace co-founder? Were conservatives really doing that to an environmentalist?
00:01:46.740
Well, you'd be right. I've never, not once in my life, ever heard of a deplatforming campaign
00:01:51.100
committed by conservatives against liberals. I just haven't. Have you? Not even on campus,
00:01:55.840
not in the media, not at any event, anywhere that I can think of, and I keep an eye peeled.
00:02:00.900
That's a tactic of the left. It's Leninist. It's brutal. This story I'm telling you only makes
00:02:06.960
sense when you know that the co-founder of Greenpeace we're talking about here is our friend
00:02:11.660
Patrick Moore. Moore was there at the very beginning of Greenpeace. He was on the boat
00:02:18.780
sailing to protect the whales. That's him right there in the center to stop hydrogen bombs. Look
00:02:24.440
at him there. That sort of thing. He was, there he is. He really cares about those things. But over time,
00:02:31.540
he became skeptical of Greenpeace's political extremism and their rejection of science. That's
00:02:40.140
the thing. He was the only PhD in the first crew of Greenpeace. So he knows his stuff, but they've
00:02:46.520
moved into politics and socialism and junk science. He parted ways with them when they declared war. I
00:02:52.160
think it was on chlorine. Now, of course, chlorine is one of the most essential elements. You may know
00:02:57.960
that salt is called sodium chloride. Chlorine is half that molecule. We need chlorine for a range of
00:03:06.340
things, including many important medicines. We put chlorine in swimming pools to kill bacteria. I think
00:03:12.500
that's when he pulled away from Greenpeace, if I recall, when they went to war against a natural
00:03:17.640
element that we need for medicine. He also supports peaceful atomic energy, which he points out has no
00:03:24.120
greenhouse gas emissions, if you care about that kind of thing. Patrick Moore departs from Greenpeace
00:03:29.420
on that. He's still a save the whales guy, though. Very strong on those sorts of things. He's just not
00:03:34.880
a communist kook like the rest of his former team. So yeah, he's the one environmental activist in the
00:03:41.120
world who gets banned from places. So he was invited to speak at a sustainability conference
00:03:46.380
in Regina, Saskatchewan, which is a pretty good place to invite a speaker who supports safe,
00:03:52.740
clean nuclear energy. Because of course, Saskatchewan, as you probably know, is a major producer of
00:03:58.540
uranium. And that's used in peaceful nuclear reactors. And unlike wind turbines, nuclear reactors
00:04:05.020
work when it's not windy or when it's too windy. And unlike solar panels, nuclear reactors work when it's
00:04:11.220
not sunny, you know, like, like at night. So yeah, I mean, I don't know exactly what the word
00:04:16.980
sustainable means to any given person. But if you think it means something about carbon dioxide,
00:04:22.000
and if you're worried that burning fossil fuels releases carbon dioxide, and if you think that's
00:04:26.740
bad, which is nuts, by the way, but still, then you probably should like nuclear because it generates
00:04:33.360
heat from a nuclear reaction. It's not burning stuff and emitting CO2. There's no CO2 involved.
00:04:38.940
It's a different reaction altogether. That is, if you really do care about carbon dioxide. And I know
00:04:45.400
that you don't because everything in life is carbon based, including you and me and all plants and
00:04:50.440
animals and wood and most of our planet. Carbon is the sixth element in the periodic table. It's in
00:04:58.120
almost everything. So it's all just a scam to levy carbon taxes. But if you really do say you're
00:05:04.080
worried about carbon dioxide, and I know you're not, then nuclear is really the only real option,
00:05:10.920
at least in a flat place like Saskatchewan, where there aren't mighty raging rivers for
00:05:15.620
hydroelectric dams. So yeah, Patrick Moore, the perfect choice to speak in this conference. But see,
00:05:22.180
he disputes that carbon dioxide is a problem. He doesn't dispute that the climate changes.
00:05:27.900
That's absurd that the climate changes all the time, always has. If you've ever heard of the ice
00:05:32.340
ages and know that North America was once covered in a sheet of ice, and you can see that we're not
00:05:37.100
now, then you know about climate change. Patrick Moore, Dr. Moore, let's just be accurate,
00:05:43.200
just says it's not related to carbon dioxide and certainly not to man-made carbon dioxide. That's
00:05:48.420
not what ended the last major glaciation, as it's called, when we were covered in a mile of ice until
00:05:53.740
about 10,000 years ago. What I was showing you there was one of Dr. Moore's slides from his
00:05:58.060
presentation where he talks about climate change. He's not against talking about climate change,
00:06:03.660
he just explains it like a scientist, not a politician. I have to tell you, he's a very
00:06:08.660
interesting speaker. And you can tell he still deeply cares about the environment. He understands
00:06:14.320
the cycles of nature. He understands how trees are important. He's got a whole book on the subject.
00:06:20.640
Trees are the answer. How it's fine to use wood, because it's renewable. We can plant more trees.
00:06:27.200
How plastic is non-toxic? It's low emission. I mean, he's thinking practically, which most
00:06:32.480
environmentalists never do. And he, most important proves, at least I think he proves it, that man-made
00:06:38.960
global warming is just not a thing. It's not the reason, or at least it's not a significant reason,
00:06:44.000
why the globe is very slowly warming. And it's not from carbon dioxide. And in fact, the world has
00:06:51.120
too little carbon dioxide from the point of view of successful plant life. When you look over the
00:06:56.340
millions of years of life on Earth, we're starving of carbon dioxide now. Now, I'm not
00:07:02.200
doing his point of view justice, because I'm not a PhD in ecology. He is, so listen to him.
00:07:07.820
I've seen his presentations. He actually came on one of our Rebel cruises, our first Rebel cruise. It was
00:07:12.520
amazing. I wish more people could see his presentation, including leftists and students
00:07:18.140
and environmental activists. Either they would criticize Dr. Moore's point of view and challenge
00:07:23.440
it, and maybe Dr. Moore might improve his theory. I don't know. That's the scientific method, right?
00:07:28.460
Put out a hypothesis and test it and change your hypothesis. Or maybe, what I think, he would actually
00:07:35.240
convince those environmental activists of his point of view. And they would certainly come away
00:07:39.500
understanding how deeply he cares about the environment. I can sure sense it. But look,
00:07:45.060
leftist protesters are not interested in learning or science. They're interested in power.
00:07:50.180
So look at this. Regina paying climate crisis skeptic $10,000 to speak at a sustainability conference.
00:07:59.620
Look at it. Put sustainability in scare quotes. My first thought upon seeing that in the CBC
00:08:04.580
state broadcaster was, he's only speaking for $10,000? The CBC's own David Suzuki charges $30,000.
00:08:12.920
And Dr. Moore actually is a subject matter expert. See, when was the last time that the CBC did a
00:08:18.760
shock and awe story about any left-winger giving a speech on campus? Is the $10,000 part supposed to be
00:08:26.420
the scandal? If so, why the silence when Suzuki does it? When multimillionaire Justin Trudeau charged
00:08:33.140
actual charities $25,000 a pop for speeches even after he became an MP. Why are they suddenly
00:08:39.300
interested in that? Look at this. You of our scientists dismayed by Citi's decision to have
00:08:46.920
Patrick Moore speak at conference. Do you see that sub-headline there? Well then, a scientist is
00:08:52.540
dismayed. Better censor someone with a different point of view then, because a scientist says so.
00:08:58.660
I'm embarrassed for the University of Regina that that's their contribution to this news,
00:09:03.100
calling for censorship, because someone has a different point of view. But get this.
00:09:07.800
A former Greenpeace director who disputes there's a climate emergency and that man-made carbon
00:09:13.920
emissions are harmful has the top billing at the city of Regina's upcoming conference on future
00:09:18.160
sustainability. Oh, so it's not even just that he's a skeptic of the theory of man-made global warming,
00:09:23.980
or the theory that carbon dioxide is the control knob of the climate, as Professor Al Gore told us.
00:09:29.700
It's that Dr. Moore is skeptical that there is a climate emergency, climate emergency. That's a
00:09:35.700
political phrase. That's a slogan. That's a bumper sticker phrase. That's hyperbole, of course.
00:09:40.000
Emergency, emergency. Is there an emergency? Really? So they're not even pretending anymore at the CBC.
00:09:45.720
If you don't support the official Liberal Party of Canada talking points, not just the science,
00:09:50.180
but the political talking points. Emergency. Is emergency science? I mean, if you don't do that,
00:09:57.320
you're unacceptable in the eyes of the state broadcaster and the state university, the
00:10:02.320
University of Regina. The government doesn't like you if you don't agree with them, but of course.
00:10:06.760
And look at that. Look at that. If you look on the page there, scroll down, the state broadcaster
00:10:11.500
posts a tweet by a U.S.-based anti-oil lobby group called DeSmogBlog, not even pretending to be
00:10:17.720
anything more than a political megaphone for the extreme left, the anti-oil left. Why is that
00:10:22.480
being promoted by the CBC state broadcaster? But if you think the CBC state broadcaster is bad,
00:10:29.360
look at this from the bailout newspapers, the Regina Leader Post, allegedly a private sector
00:10:35.540
newspaper company, but not anymore. Post Media that owns it receives $140,000 per week
00:10:42.620
from Trudeau's media bailout fund. And boy, are they earning every cent of it in Regina. Let me
00:10:49.420
quote, climate change denier, Patrick Moore, to speak at Regina Sustainability Conference.
00:10:56.620
Yeah, no, he's not a climate change denier. I've seen his talk. This is one of his slides.
00:11:03.520
All he talks about is climate change and trying to explain it and understand it.
00:11:10.020
Why were there glaciers and there's not now? Saying he's a climate change denier is a 100%
00:11:17.820
pure lie from a stupid person. The city of Regina, let me quote, the city of Regina is defending its
00:11:26.160
decision to hire a well-known climate change denier to speak at his upcoming Sustainability
00:11:31.820
Conference. Really? Well-known climate change denier. You lying liar with your lies.
00:11:40.020
They quote some crank. Channon Zekidniak, the founder of a local environmental organization.
00:11:47.480
Hey guys, hey guys, she founded EnviroCollective, so listen to her. She said her group would like to
00:11:52.800
see more removed from the agenda. The objective of this conference is to set the framework to make
00:11:58.860
Regina 100% renewable by 2050. It is not helpful to have someone who disputes the science behind
00:12:05.100
climate change. Being one of the prominent speakers of that event, said Zekidniak during a phone interview.
00:12:10.880
I bet they phoned her. Of course they did. So some local activist extremist thinks someone else should
00:12:18.900
be banned from speaking because he's not helpful to her cause. By the way, her cause is nuts.
00:12:24.740
I'd like to invite anyone in Saskatchewan who wants to get rid of fossil fuels and nuclear fuels to leave
00:12:33.380
my example today and turn off the gas to your home and stop driving your car when it's what? I don't
00:12:40.680
know. I didn't check the weather in Saskatchewan today. Is it minus 20? Is it minus 30? I checked it. It
00:12:45.520
was minus 39 in Tuktoyaktuk. It's probably only minus 20 in Saskatchewan. You go first, lady.
00:12:53.880
It has been that cold this winter. I mean, talk about nuts. But what you see here is a confection,
00:12:59.740
a recipe. You're watching fake news, political meddling being made in real time. It's being
00:13:05.080
cooked up. There's no grassroots way to have Dr. Moore deplatformed. To be fair, most people in
00:13:10.820
Regina have never heard of Dr. Moore, and I bet most who have heard of him will probably be
00:13:14.880
interested in hearing from him, aren't you? Co-founder of Greenpeace, who has a bit of a
00:13:18.780
change of heart, still believes in whales and seals and stuff, is pro-nuclear, but is worried about
00:13:24.680
this. He's just such an interesting guy. You don't want to hear him? And those who don't want to hear
00:13:29.980
him, so what? So go see one of the countless left-wing, think-alike, talk-alike, global warming
00:13:36.120
profiteers out there. I'm sure Al Gore will be around soon enough. There is no mob with pitchforks
00:13:41.980
trying to get this guy canceled. There's just a few losers on the CBC reporter's speed dial.
00:13:47.760
A few losers on Twitter and a bored academic looking for some media coverage to feel relevant.
00:13:53.160
Yeah, we don't censor people for not being helpful, except that the CBC's mission is to turn that into
00:13:59.480
a thing, this whole thing into a thing, because the CBC is a state broadcaster whose own survival is
00:14:04.640
linked to pleasing Justin Trudeau. So step one was to demonize Dr. Moore. Step two was to call for him
00:14:11.880
to be fired. I've seen the CBC do this many times. So the CBC makes the complaint, and then the CBC
00:14:18.660
reports on its own complaint, as if it weren't a central force behind confecting it. Look at this.
00:14:24.380
Regina now reviewing decision to pay $10,000 to Patrick Moore for a talk at a sustainability
00:14:29.620
conference. Look at this. Oh, this is my favorite. Outcry and controversy prompts review. Yeah, no,
00:14:35.880
you lying liars. It is not an outcry. It is not a controversy. It's you. It's you, the CBC, and the
00:14:42.560
rest of your little media party club. You turn off your gas right now. I've seen this sort of thing
00:14:49.260
myself. Do you remember when I went to the UK about a year ago covering Tommy Robinson's case in court,
00:14:53.940
and there was this BBC reporter, I remember his name was Dominique Cassiani, and he reported me
00:14:59.700
to the police, literally, to the Metropolitan Police of London, because I made a little video
00:15:06.000
about Tommy. So this BBC reporter, the state broadcaster over there, complained about me to
00:15:11.360
the police. I have a copy of his complaint. And then that same BBC reporter called me for comment
00:15:18.280
about the complaint that he made to the police, as if he weren't manufacturing the story, as if he
00:15:25.500
were some neutral reporter. That's deeply unethical, of course, for a real journalist, but government
00:15:31.200
journalists aren't real journalists. And the CBC is full of Dominique Cassiani's. I'm not saying the
00:15:36.640
private sector journalists in Canada are any better on global warming. The Regina Leader Post article was
00:15:41.460
outright defamatory, to be honest. But remember, Trudeau owns the CBC. He only rents Post Media. Frankly,
00:15:48.860
that makes Post Media journalists more nervous, because they worry that maybe their annual bailout won't be
00:15:53.540
renewed. Whereas at the CBC, they know it will be. Can't trust the media party. 90% of them are on the
00:16:00.420
payroll. Here's a global news story. Regina reviewing decision to hire climate skeptic Patrick Moore for
00:16:07.920
keynote speech. Now, global is not owned by the state, and it's not a newspaper on the bailout. But it is
00:16:14.380
highly regulated by the CRTC, and must win the approval of Trudeau constantly. CRTC has the power to
00:16:21.420
literally destroy media outlets, if it doesn't like, by either changing the terms of their media
00:16:25.820
license, or removing it altogether. Seriously, in Canada, you need a license to make a TV show on
00:16:31.300
real TV or radio. It's how the CRTC killed Sun News Network. So, global and CTV, they have to behave
00:16:38.260
how Trudeau wants them to behave. So, look at this. He also holds controversial views about the shrinking
00:16:46.580
polar bear population, the death of the Great Barrier Reef and the Great Pacific Garbage Patch.
00:16:51.540
Now, I'm pretty familiar with the first of those, polar bears. I happen to know that the polar bear
00:16:58.180
population is actually exploding, thriving, growing, whatever you want to call it. So, right there,
00:17:08.220
global news, well, they're lying to you, obviously, but not only are they lying, they're accusing Dr.
00:17:14.460
Moore of lying about polar bears when he speaks the truth about it. They're lying liars, and they're
00:17:19.180
telling lies. And listen to this wording. Global News spoke with Moore on Monday morning, asking him
00:17:25.900
what he thinks about the controversy swirling around him. What controversy? I mean, I get it. A handful of
00:17:32.200
left-wing journalists are whipping up a fake storm. Controversy swirling. I love that. I wonder if a single
00:17:38.360
normal person has even weighed in on this. It's 100% fake news by activists and media party advocates.
00:17:46.160
The mayor said, while some of his views are fine, oh, good, I have the approval of a mayor. Oh, thank
00:17:52.300
God, I was waiting for that. Some of Moore's other views are problematic. Fougere, that's the name of the
00:17:59.420
mayor, emphasized the city believes there is a climate issue, a severe one. Got it. Got it. So,
00:18:08.300
we have a mayor deciding which opinions are acceptable and which are problematic. Is that his job?
00:18:15.980
Is that constitutional for him to do? Is he willing to go head-to-head with Dr. Moore in a debate about
00:18:23.020
global warming? Now, that's a debate I'd pay to see in a kind of stare-at-a-car-crash kind of way.
00:18:30.060
Oh, man. There's a severe climate issue, is there? Yeah, I agree. It's damn cold in Saskatchewan. We
00:18:37.380
got us a severe climate issue, people. But then again, it is winter, so that severe climate issue
00:18:43.200
comes around once a year. Global then quotes another professor who says, Hall and two colleagues
00:18:52.140
have recently established a climate change lecture series that includes 11 speakers from the
00:18:57.840
university. None were invited to speak at the reimagined conference, she said. We're past the
00:19:03.540
point in our history as a society that we can legitimize the idea that climate change is not
00:19:09.880
human-induced, that these natural variations that we see in climate are not something to be
00:19:13.980
concerned about. So, she's got some government-funded speakers panel or something, probably billing you
00:19:20.520
millions of dollars for. And she has 11 global warming speakers who all believe the same thing.
00:19:26.380
And she just can't stand that one speaker somewhere else is allowed to dissent for one hour on one day.
00:19:38.420
She doesn't want other points of view to even be heard even once. She's got 11 speakers, she wants 12.
00:19:45.780
She doesn't want a debate. She wants the other point of view delegitimized. She used that word
00:19:52.220
because just like the media party is a fraud, so is most of academia. They're not interested in
00:19:59.040
scholarship or learning. They're ideological trainers for students. Imagine telling students
00:20:04.460
that you prefer only one point of view being heard because otherwise it's problematic. Can you imagine what
00:20:11.320
it's like to be a student in that professor's class? If you dare ask a question, I bet you get a lower
00:20:16.760
mark. You don't want to be legitimized. Look, the media are lying about Dr. Moore. The professors and
00:20:23.920
media who used to care about free speech are the ones leading the charge to deplatform him. Regina has
00:20:29.820
an odious mayor who is more concerned about being fashionable than representing the interests of his city
00:20:34.740
and province. And all of it explains why we haven't heard any opposition to Justin Trudeau's plans
00:20:40.580
to license and regulate not only the news media, but every website in the country. Remember this?
00:20:47.340
To be fair, you've got an agency that wants to enhance its scope of powers to determine what's
00:20:53.820
a trusted news source. So the first question will be, who's to define that? You've got a lot of these
00:20:59.060
groups. Just a second. This is a recommendation, Evan. The CRTC hasn't decided anything. Okay, but
00:21:04.760
they're recommending that. They're recommending that content providers have to register and get a
00:21:10.500
license. So how will this work? How are you going to regulate websites? How are you going to register
00:21:15.720
all that? Do you buy these recommendations? Well, I mean, one of the recommendations, so you're
00:21:23.600
talking about a couple of different things here, but as far as the licensing is concerned,
00:21:27.520
is if you're a distributor of content in Canada, and obviously, you know, if you're a very small
00:21:35.140
media organization, the requirement probably wouldn't be the same as if you're Facebook or Google.
00:21:42.760
So there would have to be some proportionality embedded into this, but we would ask that they
00:21:49.680
have a license. Yes. Oh, yeah. You know, get a license, right? Yeah, they're not really
00:21:57.480
trying to censor Dr. Patrick Moore, though. No. It looks like it. What they're actually
00:22:04.520
trying to do is censor you. Dr. Moore is just standing in their way. Stay with us for more.
00:22:20.020
All right. So Boogie Jazz will get three delegates.
00:22:38.160
have you ever seen a coin toss like that in your life where you toss the coin you grab it
00:22:47.000
you look at it you check which side you're on and then you put it on your hand and surprise
00:22:52.960
pete budigieg won that little round of caucusing that was from iowa yesterday from the democratic
00:23:03.120
parties presidential caucuses the whole thing is very arcane and obscure at the best of times it's
00:23:10.500
not a one person one vote primary system they have the little meetings and conclaves and they count
00:23:16.660
and they eliminate and they schmooze and merge it looks very friendly very old townish and one of
00:23:22.260
the rules is if they have a tie in one of these little caucuses they do break the tie with a coin
00:23:27.760
toss but i ain't never seen a coin toss like that i thought it was a symbol of how kooky the night
00:23:32.920
was joining us now via skype from los angeles where he has just returned from iowa is our friend
00:23:38.980
joel pollack senior editor at large of brightbar.com joel um i was a little kooky at the best times that
00:23:45.140
coin toss is a symbol of that but last night felt like a meltdown what it was what did it look like
00:23:49.260
from where you were well actually the coin toss is a more humane version of the old system under the
00:23:56.660
previous rules it was pistols at dawn what no i'm just kidding
00:24:02.460
you know i mean it could be it's so obscure and unusual um so well look it's not there are other
00:24:12.320
places in the country where close elections are decided by coin tosses in this case it's not really
00:24:18.800
deciding the outcome of the caucuses what they're doing is electing delegates to the state convention
00:24:24.340
who will then decide who will get the state's nomination the state's delegates at the national
00:24:30.860
party convention so it's one or two steps removed but yes it does look a little funny but the real
00:24:36.260
scandal in iowa is not over the coin toss the real scandal in iowa is over the fact that
00:24:41.420
almost 24 hours after the caucuses were done there's no sense of who actually won the iowa state democratic
00:24:51.040
party releases uh has released or it's about to release depending on what time zone you're in
00:24:57.020
uh 50 of the results but they don't have 100 of the results yet and it's odd because we're not
00:25:03.140
talking about large numbers of people i was at a caucus in des moines iowa yesterday which was one of
00:25:07.920
the largest ones and they had 680 voters so that's not a lot of people to count and in fact they counted
00:25:14.540
everybody by hand so that's why people are confused and upset that the computer system or the cell phone
00:25:25.040
app that they were supposed to be using to tabulate all these votes did not seem to work yeah i mean
00:25:30.800
it's not like they were counting every single vote in the state it's a smallish state to begin with
00:25:36.280
these were just democrats just democrats who physically turned out to these caucusing places
00:25:41.480
i think i mean you correct me if i'm wrong on any of this that's 600 people that's not a long time
00:25:46.980
to count that you you've got scrutineers there i imagine as we say people observing it um i don't
00:25:53.180
know how many individual cause you know how many individual caucuses there were in iowa would there
00:25:57.220
have been a hundred even i think it was i'd be guessing here i don't know the exact number someone
00:26:03.660
else asked me the same question i don't know the exact number but i was in des moines which is the
00:26:07.180
largest city and there are i think a couple hundred precincts in des moines so extrapolate
00:26:12.200
over the state we're not talking about a huge number of voting precincts let's say in the ballpark
00:26:18.020
of a thousand to two thousand and i'm guessing again here but the real question i think comes down
00:26:23.100
to how they did it they used a new process this year where they used a kind of ranked choice where
00:26:28.160
you came to the caucus you stated your preference for a particular candidate and if that candidate received
00:26:33.280
more than 15 percent of the vote at that caucus they made it to the second round the candidates
00:26:38.780
that did not make it well they had a lot of voters who supported them who are now free to make
00:26:42.880
a second choice and they could choose one of the candidates who survived through to the second round
00:26:47.800
or they could band together and choose one of the candidates who didn't make it through on the first
00:26:52.300
count that is so confusing it's like a transferable ballot go ahead it's not that confusing if you have
00:26:58.800
someone who knows how to do it i think the problem was they just didn't have well here's actually the real
00:27:04.680
problem i think i think this is when we when we figure out what the problem is behind all of this i think
00:27:08.280
it'll turn out to be the following one of the choices you have between the first and second vote
00:27:14.040
if your candidate did not clear 15 i was at a caucus where joe biden missed the 15 threshold so if you're one of
00:27:22.800
those biden voters and your candidate only got let's say 11 well you could choose to go with one
00:27:28.580
of the other candidates or you could choose to go home and a lot of people simply went home they did
00:27:33.200
not want to support another candidate so that doesn't theoretically pose a problem for the system
00:27:39.380
except for some of the people counting votes now they had fewer voters in the room and i think it
00:27:44.160
confused a lot of people because for example we had 680 at the start of our caucus by the time they
00:27:49.940
counted the first round there were only 677 there were even a couple of votes for people who aren't
00:27:54.840
even running there was a vote for cory booker who was already out of the race and then you have people
00:27:58.920
leaving after the first round a huge number of people not just the joe biden people but a lot of
00:28:03.100
the people whose candidate did make it through to the next round just decided to go home so the number
00:28:07.580
of people who remained was something like less than half of the original 680 now this caucus had a very
00:28:12.820
competent manager she knew what she was doing and she knew only to count the difference that is to say
00:28:18.660
the new votes on the second round for candidates who didn't get those votes the first round but i
00:28:23.280
imagine that for someone who didn't really know what was doing what was working or how to work this
00:28:27.740
system and who hadn't done it before i imagine it was very difficult and i'm not sure that the app
00:28:32.120
that they developed for this had appropriate programs in it or appropriate code to take in all of
00:28:40.140
this information they wanted not just to know how many delegates were won by each caucus by each
00:28:45.640
precinct and each candidate in each precinct they also wanted to know who won the first ballot who
00:28:49.800
won the second ballot so this app was being asked to take in a whole bunch of information when all
00:28:54.700
people really wanted to know was who got more votes than who else yeah it's just it was just
00:28:59.440
needlessly complicated reporting they what they could have done i think in retrospect was simply report
00:29:04.320
the total number of votes for each candidate at each caucus and get to all the other information
00:29:08.660
in the weeks that follow because there's six weeks between the iowa caucus roughly six maybe seven
00:29:13.520
between the iowa caucus and the state convention they had plenty of time to work this out but they
00:29:18.160
tried to do it all with the fancy app on a phone and the system was broken enough as it was complicated
00:29:24.320
enough as it was the conspiracy theory going around is that joe biden did so badly that the party big
00:29:30.280
wigs spiked the result there may be some truth to that and in fact as we speak right now joe biden's
00:29:35.200
campaign is considering going to court to stop the results from being reported because they're not going
00:29:40.820
to be fully reported and they're concerned that he might be in fifth place or worse maybe the caucus
00:29:45.500
i was at he was in fifth place and that's an urban caucus with people concerned about electability
00:29:50.440
some more moderate people perhaps the winner of our caucus was elizabeth warren who actually showed
00:29:55.880
up in person to give a speech that's allowed by the way campaigning within the caucus is part of how
00:30:00.380
it works so she showed up personally her candidates her delegates her supporters her caucus
00:30:05.420
goers outnumbered the rest but she was first then bernie sanders then pete brutigieg then amy klobuchar
00:30:11.260
and biden failed to qualify wow that i think was mirrored throughout the state i don't think warren
00:30:16.380
won a whole lot of precincts but i think she did fairly well second or third and pete brutigieg did
00:30:22.100
fairly well bernie sanders probably won iowa amy klobuchar and joe biden nobody knows who was fourth
00:30:28.340
who was fifth and i think biden's people are very worried that they'll see a rapid drop-off in support
00:30:34.100
in other states if he is out of the top four they they said this morning they thought he was in the
00:30:38.820
top four a little remark escaped his spokesperson on one of the american news networks she was asked
00:30:46.040
how they did and she said well we're we're bunched up in the top four that was her guess if they're
00:30:51.400
not bunched up in the top four it's gonna look pretty bad for joe biden yeah here's a quick clip
00:30:55.560
of cnn's jake tapper talking to one of these little clusters of biden voters uh who were hoping they could
00:31:02.620
become what he called viable take a quick look at this biden how are we doing over here this does
00:31:08.360
not look like 56 people so the biden biden group so you're you're you you look like lovely wonderful
00:31:15.940
people but it doesn't look like you made the viability threshold not yet not there's time
00:31:22.100
this year i'm not trying to be funny but i don't know but but where what are you going to do
00:31:29.840
we're going to stand we're going to stand strong with our first choice and when other candidates
00:31:35.120
are not viable we know that joe is a lot of people's second choice and will become viable
00:31:40.380
in the second uh alignment so i got to tell you first of all it looks really fun everyone hanging
00:31:44.940
out schmoozing looks like those uh some of those ladies that were ready to go they were holding their
00:31:49.020
coats as if they just wanted to go that's a massive time commitment uh it seems like it's not just go
00:31:55.220
show what my connects and go um if joe biden is in fourth or fifth but he's the establishment
00:32:03.100
candidate sounds like the democrats have a version of the trump movement which is the grassroots hate
00:32:09.880
the establishment and vice versa what do you think well there's something to that although i think on the
00:32:15.780
left the grassroots are more part of the establishment than they were on the right it's a topic for another
00:32:22.260
time i will say this the biden people had been saying as far back as september that iowa was not
00:32:27.280
a must-win state for them so even though they campaigned hard i think they were already trying
00:32:32.280
to lower expectations in september and they are hoping as of right now that they can keep their lead
00:32:38.980
in south carolina every poll still shows him leading in south carolina although his lead is dwindling
00:32:43.860
they're hoping he can keep his lead with african-american voters and this is how beautiful is this
00:32:49.680
they're gambling on nevada that's right las vegas reno and nevada that's going to be a big showdown
00:32:57.060
biden and sanders in the latest poll are in a statistical dead heat so if joe biden is going to
00:33:02.700
stay in the race much past super tuesday he's going to have to win nevada not just because it's going to
00:33:08.120
forecast voter trends but because he's got to keep his donors on board and they're going to look to back
00:33:12.540
a winning candidate if they see that biden's not doing well they're going to quickly try to find
00:33:16.780
someone else other than sanders to support i doubt many biden donors would move over to sanders and
00:33:22.360
i'm not sure he would take them but i think that nevada is going to be really interesting so
00:33:27.880
you've got nothing else to do over president's day weekend in nevada and through the week that
00:33:32.840
follows you should you should come hang out never a bad reason to go to vegas this time it's a real
00:33:37.120
gamble wow well joel thanks for giving us your time i know you just got back to la so you got to catch
00:33:41.860
up on stuff yeah um i follow you on breitbart.com i encourage all our viewers to do so this is very
00:33:47.660
interesting times we'll have to start sending our canadian reporters down there to get things
00:33:51.320
firsthand but we'll always rely on you for analysis joel thanks for your time yeah you don't have to
00:33:56.760
register here at least not yet oh that's right yeah you're talking about journalist registration
00:34:01.240
holy cow yeah it's a global embarrassment that's for sure all right take care my friend thanks for
00:34:05.520
your help take care there you have a joel pollack senior editor at large uh breitbart.com and isn't
00:34:12.040
that funny his comment at the end there i don't know if you caught it is a reference to registration
00:34:16.220
of journalists uh trudeau's scheme has made world headlines stay with us more ahead on the rebel
00:34:21.860
well what do you think about the show today i am outraged that they're coming to de-platform
00:34:35.980
uh dr patrick moore i as as i record this he has not yet been de-platform but if he is
00:34:43.980
i would encourage him to sue for breach of contract and not just for breach of contract to sue those who
00:34:51.560
induced the breach of contract that's what i did when i was de-platformed in alberta remember my book
00:34:57.520
launched some leftist extremists scared the theater owner into ripping up the contract i get the feeling
00:35:04.080
that this conference will hold firm the whole point of a conference is to have interesting different
00:35:10.940
points of view dr moore is one of 45 speakers and i can't think of a better promotional marketing
00:35:16.700
campaign than someone wants to speak or band buy your ticket now if they're smart they'll go ahead
00:35:22.200
with it and love the publicity and sell a lot more tickets i wonder if they're good and smart or if
00:35:28.980
they're just too afraid we'll find out soon that's our show for today until next time on behalf of all
00:35:34.180
of us here at rebel world headquarters good night and keep fighting for freedom